Christians, Church, and Lockdowns

We had church this Sunday.  Albeit at home with a few others.  It wasn't the same, but was definitely better than watching it via live stream.  We spent most of our time talking about how Christians and the Church should respond to this "crisis".  Yes I used quotation marks to point out my cynical and growing suspicious view of the lock down.  I didn't begin so suspicious, but there are so many aspects of this "crisis" that just don't make much sense.  Our church, like most others, have obediently went along with the lock down and followed orders from public health officials.  We did not want to harm any congregants or our community.  But now, the feelings are starting to change and many are wanting to open Church for services once again.  Not in the rebellious, "you are not the boss of me" kind of way.  More like, "we miss our brothers and sisters and the spiritual, soul feeding" kind of way.  But, I get the sense it may morph into a more in-your-face style of civil disobedience issue if things don't change.

I want to start out by saying that I belong to a conservative Protestant Evangelical church.  We believe in the inerrancy and primacy of the Scriptures.  We are kind of like the strict-constructionist or originalists of Biblical interpretation.  We attempt to understand the Bible and conform our lives to that standard.  I also want to point out that I have always been uncomfortable with the cozy relationship between religion and politics, especially with the mainline Protestants and the Republican party.  This relationship has the tendency to blur the lines between political ideology and religious doctrine.  In fact, I have seen on a number of occasion in which doctrine has been realigned to fit with ideology.  Obviously this is the tail wagging the dog.  Well established doctrine should not be manipulated by ideology or political expediency to win in the short term.  Christians are not about the short term, political expediency or pragmatic approaches.  As Christians, we are taught to be foreigners, "straying pilgrims", sojourners, and abiding in reverent fear as we prepare for eternity.  As the old hymn says, "This world is not my home."  

I am not saying Christians should not use their voice or participate at all in politics.  Only that when Christians do get involved in political issues, they need to be very aware of the dangers and issues that can quickly and easily arise.  Supporting awful candidates, even when their awfulness is apparent to all, or fighting political battles in a manner that is not worthy of the Gospel, is just a few that come to mind.  I reminded of the ole saying about wrestling with pigs, "When you wrestle with a pig, you are going to get muddy, but the pig likes it."  Such it is with the world.  When the Christian gets involved, we tend to get muddy and the world likes it.

I say all this to discuss how Christians should be responding and behaving during this pandemic.  How do Christians live the Gospel in times such as these?  Before I get into the religious side, I would like to make some points about the political.

I am no constitutional or legal scholar, but I do have some knowledge regarding the Constitution, our historical context, and knowledge of specific court cases.  An easy understanding of the Bill Of Rights is that they essentially protect our life, liberty, and property (LLP) from the government's ability to arbitrarily and capriciously limit or take those away.  The federal government, as well as the state government, cannot limit or remove your LLP without having a compelling reason to do so and provides due process rights.  A compelling reason basically states that the burden of proof is on the government to establish evidence that clearly shows a need to limit or restrict one's LLP.  This type of evidence includes the probability of a substantial impact on other's LLP or an impact on the government's ability to provide a protection for LLP.  I believe the Supreme Court would call it a "clear and present danger".  If the government can establish a compelling reason, then they must also provide due process, or a fair and just method to limit LLP.  This process includes things like transparency, being able to respond to or provide an argument against, and ensure that there is no prejudicial or biased discrimination.  

In times of crisis and emergency, the constitution and the Supreme Court have found that governments can deny certain rights and liberties citizens would enjoy in times of peace or absent of a crisis.  Some of the more famous, or infamous, incidents are Lincoln's suspension of habeus corpus, the Espionage Act of 1917 during WWI, the internment of the Japanese during WWII,  and more recently the Patriot Act in response to the 9/11 terrorist attack.  All of these actions were in response to a very real and tangible crisis that was easily recognizable to the average citizen, but also seen by many as unconstitutional.

So the questions essentially are: does this pandemic provide a compelling reason to limit and restrict people's LLP?  Have the lock down orders from public officials met the constitutional muster of providing due process?

The answer to the first question is yes, and no.  I think in the first two or three weeks of the lock down, there was substantial amount of concern and probability of some very damaging outcomes.  But, beyond that time frame, I find the lock down to be more dubious.  If you have never heard of the 1969 pandemic, look it up.  You probably haven't, and that is my point.  Moreover, there seems to be so much uncertainty regarding COVID-19 and so much we don't know.  But here is the deal regarding a compelling reason and your rights, some are more important than others.  For example, I can make a compelling reason argument to say that social media is repugnant and damaging our society, or that online pornography should be eliminated.  But the First Amendment's Free Speech Clause doesn't care about my, or any other's compelling argument.  It is dead on arrival.  If the government said that it was going to censor any critique of its handling of the COVID-19 crisis, the press and the public would be outraged.   It is hard to argue that the same would not hold true for the Free Exercise Clause.  Meeting at a church to worship, seems like a Free Exercise to me!

The due process component is even more dubious.  Businesses were forced to closed and intimidated to remain closed with no clear duration for the closure.  The Eminent Domain clause states that if a the government is going to take your property for public use, they must provide just compensation.  It is hard not to consider these closures in a similar light.  The government closed private businesses to protect public health.  There was no real chance to express a counter argument, ask for other considerations, or even a clear explanation of what the government considered to be an "essential" business.  Much of these closures to businesses happened with little push-back because most Americans were trying to do the right and patriotic thing in a moment of crisis. I know business owners who were very concerned about the health of their employees and their families.  Now, their feelings have changed as they are on the brink of losing their business, losing their homes, letting long time employees go, and faced with the uncertainty that they will be able to regain their pre-pandemic form.

To me, the government cannot make the compelling reason argument to force churches to close or limit their assemblies nor have they met the requirements of affording due process.  So how should churches proceed?

Biblically speaking, there are a number of scriptures and events that can give us some insight and direction towards a Godly answer. Sure there are a few examples of God's people rebelling against the authorities.  Nebuchadnezzar and Daniel come to mind as do Peter and John's response to the Sanhedrin when told not speak about Jesus. However, never does it call for an open insurrection and rebellion.  In fact, on multiple occasions we are instructed to obey the governing authorities.  It is clear that as Christians, we are supposed to be willing to publicly confess our faith and be obedient regardless of whatever circumstances come our way.  What is most prevalent through out the New Testament, is the constant teaching and understanding that as Christians, we are going to face opposition, persecution, and trials because of our public confession and our obedience.  Even more daunting is the command to find joy in such situations As my wife likes to rightly point out, we American Christians don't have a real understanding of the legitimate threats many Christian's in much more hostile settings do.  But nonetheless, governments, laws, abuses, and "crisis" do not dictate who we are or how we react.

Now about going to church.  We are definitely instructed to meet together regardless of government dictate.  The early Church continued to meet together and worship in the face of serious opposition.  Could you imagine if the authorities told Peter that he could not worship God with others?  For some reason, I don't think he would be so inclined.  We need to remember our call to be ambassadors of Christ and advocated of the Gospel.  That means we don't need to be antagonistic, ugly, or demeaning in our response to returning to church.  We can do it in a way that promotes the health and well-being of the church.  It also means the we need to ensure a way to protect our vulnerable members and develop ways we can meet in the way that the church should.  "We do not belong to those who shrink back and are destroyed, but to those who have faith and are saved."